On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:31:28 +0200 Ethan Wilson <ethan.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dear MD developers, > it seems that with mdadm 3.3.1 , if an array has bad blocks disabled > (e.g. "--update=no-bbl" was invoked) and we want to add a disk to that > array, e.g. a spare, that one will be created by mdadm with BBL enabled > during the --add operation. > > There is apparently no "--add --no-bbl" option in mdadm, so the BBL will > result in being forcibly active for that disk, it seems to me. > > It is indeed possible to "--stop" the array and then "--assemble > --update=no-bbl" so to clear the BBL flag in all disks, but this > requires stopping the array, which for a production system often is not > possible, and not justified for just adding a spare. > > Can I add a "feature request" to have BBL optional, and/or to default > BBL presence/absence so that it conforms to the presence/absence of BBLs > in the other disks of the array which is already running? > > The same problem probably happens when mdadm monitor daemon moves spares > among the spare-group: it should probably understand if the receiving > array is configured for BBL or not, and add a spare of the same type. > Why don't you want bad-block-lists? I'm not necessarily against having some why to avoid getting them automatically ... possibly a 'policy' option in mdadm.conf. But I'd like to make sure I understand all of your thinking first. Thanks, NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
